Iron Ranger Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Stoping Bulling air fleets - two options now that v1.07 is out and this area was not changed. 1) Follow Shaka's route and limit the number of air fleets each country can have 2) Make a house rule that you can't invest in LR - this hurts UK but to cominsate by not allowing any investing in IT. This should help USSR and maybe shift the game to the importance of the eastern front. [ April 28, 2003, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: Iron Ranger ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorber Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 YES, YES, YES! I believe Ryan still has his ol page up... yes there it is! Ryans HICOM page still going strong! Hail to Ryan for being one of the only friendly dudes out there to keep the old HICOM spirit flying. I am not worthy of kissing his ugly King Cobra ! /Gorberdude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 29, 2003 Author Share Posted April 29, 2003 gorber I had a sneaking suspicion you already knew him. Agreed, he's a really great guy and I'm pleased to say, a fellow former SAC member. Thanks for posting his page up there. [ April 28, 2003, 06:44 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 kenfedoroff Whats up dude! Character is the standard one you get from the UBB Code "list item". JerseyJohn I understand your point about the fight and retreat. But I believe at the scale we are dealing with, most of that fight and retreat is occuring by the divisions within the Corp/Army unit we have. But more importantly, adding the ability to retreat has created alot more software code especially when determing where to retreat and if you can retreat to that hex. And then there is the effect on readiness and action points. gorber Let me rephrase the question regarding the "the code is just lying there", since it appears you feel you are being attacked. I have HC. Played it. Wrote about it when I did an economic comparison betwen SC, COS, HC and 3R. Your statement intrigued me, since I thought you had some sort of knoweldge or access to the software code. I was aware of the intent to convert it to Windows and thought maybe you were one of those with the unfinished code. I agree with most of the points you made about HC. Iron Ranger Interesting point about not investing in LR. I think I will "borrow" this idea from you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorber Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Shaka, "The code is just laying there" was written with the knowledge in mind that Hicom has been laying in someones drawer och been shuffeled between peoples drawers since three-sixty and Colorado computer creations "seased to be" back in the early 90:s. The people who according to Ryan had the rights to the code (and apparently have been trying to rewrite it to windows environment for like 5 years (read havent done anything about it)) are maybe not letting it go for free, and its pretty much unusable since it was written in some ancient code or something. It was just a remark that aimed at getting someone to have a look at the solutions that was so geniously implemented in Hicom Jersey, Ive been in contact with Ryan a few times and even played som PBEM games with him (he rushed to take Italy on the first turn while playing allies and i got panic and tried to invade England hehe...) I even tipped him about this fine game but i havent seen him around here. It seems hes got other occupations nowadays besides wargames. And i dont defend myself i defend hicom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 29, 2003 Author Share Posted April 29, 2003 gorber Sounds like Ryan. When we talked about HiCom he mentioned a few times that using his E-mail head to head system, a quick Allied player could slip and and invade Italy as soon as it entered if the Axis player wasn't ready for it. Guess in your SC game with him he was applying the same theory. The last time we exchanged E-mails was when he was posting here for a while. Our E-mails were usually like the postings I have here with other guys who are history buffs. Then my E-mails began coming back as undeliverable and I've let contacting him slip a little, I shouldn't because I don't want to lose touch with him. About three years ago he was very hopeful that Hicom would become a Windows game. To me it was incredibly stupid of the COS and HiCom people to let their games remain DOS and drop out of memory. They were both good games -- flawed but good. I can't help but believe someone serious about developing them further will pick up the rights and do something creative with them. What I liked about corresponding with Ryan was his choice of words. I'd make a remark concerning Mussolini and Ryan would come back with "Yeah, Mussolini was a nincompoop, a prize numskull if there ever was one!" I was used to more restrained historical discussions and it was a lot more fun to get Ryan's E-mails and have things loosen up a bit. In addition to which he knows an awful lot about history and WW II. It's too bad he doesn't post here now. There were a few unfriendly characters when he was posting here and I think he became disgusted with them. I almost left myself because the negativity those guys put out was very annoying; I'm glad they left first. The Forum changed after that and I'm sure Ryan would have enjoyed a lot of the threads that came later. [ April 29, 2003, 03:50 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorber Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 So Jersey... Why dont we lure him back here? /Gorberdude [ April 29, 2003, 06:23 AM: Message edited by: gorber ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 29, 2003 Author Share Posted April 29, 2003 gorber An excellent idea. It's a rough week for me but I'll try his Yahoo sight a little later. [ April 29, 2003, 08:10 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorber Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Jersey, Yes, i think we can get him interrested in the patch work since he left and the SC2 coming up.. You do it when you get time.. /gorberdude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 gorber Could you do me a favor? Ask whomever what "ancient code" it was written in. Or have them contact me with that info. I've written code in most of those "ancient" languages. JersyJohn & gorber I've see this Ryan's website I believe. It would be nice if you guys got him back here. It's not an easy thing to develop software. And once you get it out there, published, unless you are very lucky or get someone like Battlefront, you are gonna get screwed out of your money (what little there is). Most designers leave in disgust afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorber Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Shaka, Maybe we could get Ryan in here and he can provide us with his contacts? Would be great if more people could start asking for the promised update. I dont know if you played it but if you visit Ryans site (link above) you can download hicom from there (I actually believe he has got permission to host it) Otherwise i got it on my ftp. Beware: it wont run on anything newer than Win 98se or possible Me. Despite the simulation capacity of XP it cant handle this bugger because of its drainage of basic memory (640kb). Or perhaps you want to try and get it running - i would be kissing the ground you walk if you did! /gorberdude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 29, 2003 Author Share Posted April 29, 2003 Shaka The two of you would make a good link, I'll do my best. gorber I'm glad I decided a few computers back not to trade my old machines in or sell them. I've found DOS programs are so slow they only work properly on slow machines with extra memory assigned using a boot disk. Early Windows programs work best on Pentium IIs running Windows 98. The ones I've found that really run flawlessly on XP are those with a running speed of 250 or better. Slower than that I've seen glitches and choppiness in their operation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 I've cannabilized my older computers, so there is no way I can get it to run. I did have it running in the past when those older machines were "state of the art". Well well... seems we have hijacked another topic. JersyJohn, you are a bad influence on me. This is the second topic we've hijacked in as many days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 30, 2003 Author Share Posted April 30, 2003 This time we didn't even have an accomplice -- worst of all, I've assisted in hijacking my own Thread! :eek: [ April 30, 2003, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorber Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 My brother have this mini-portable laptop with a 200 mhz cyrix processor and a small color plasma screen... Teriffic for running HICOM at work... must call him right away! brb... /Gorber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88mm Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Originally posted by JerseyJohn: 88mm Everything you've said we've been saying for months..... Don't expect from a new member to read ALL that is said in the past One of them involves stacking, which I feel this game needs badly, along with retreat and advance after combat among other things. It ain't gonna happen in SC 1 is it :confused: You'll see that others have said exactly the same things about the naval aspect and air fleets -- the whole thing.... Good to see i am not alone on this That's the basic battle among the people who post here: those who want the game to be more complex and more realistic, and those who want to keep things simple even if it means not having realism. Well the battle is lost already. SC 1 will never reach a serious realistic lvl. Maybe SC 2 will... One other thing, you forgot weather. I've got a link to a thread on that over there as well. Where's the Russian Winter? Where are the trucks, supply-routes, destroyers, minesweepers, anti-tank bataljons, oil, steel and other resources....well you get my point. See. The battle could go on and on. There never will be a winner So what we need is to co-op to balance things out and make the playable and enjoyable at the same time. In the end, it's a game. Not a serious historicle acurate replay of history. It's already hard to make a F1-sim realistic correct (with only 20 cars out) let alone a 5+ year conflict back 50 years ago. Where things constantly changing... What i miss in SC is the "battle-feeling" that you are overloaded with in the CM-series for example. In CM however i miss the overal strategic picture. No campaigns, no control over the reserves etc.etc. you get it, or you don't. it's all layed out. Best thing for me would be some sort of mixture between "Accros the Rhine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted May 2, 2003 Author Share Posted May 2, 2003 88mm Good point, the idea is to find a balance not only between what is and isn't feasable, but that is in line with what the most people would like to see. Unfortunately we don't know what SC2 is yet so it's difficult to define anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts